While the Prosecutor’s Office advances in the investigation against Nicholas Petroson of the president Gustavo Petroaccused of receiving money from ex-narcos and appropriating it to buy a house, former President Álvaro Uribe —in a speech where he spoke of various things and recalled the public opinion’s criticism of his children— asked that President Gustavo Petro not be “disqualified”.
“The only thing I ask is that there be no disqualifying adjectives. It is the only thing that I ask of all my colleagues and I do it in the most restrained way,” said Uribe in the middle of an event with the Democratic Center in Popayán.
Read More: “The less people know, the better”: Day Vásquez released the evidence against Nicolás Petro
And it is that the president is in the eye of the hurricane because of his son Nicolás Petro. First, his father asked that they investigate him because of the possibility that Nicolás is one of the participants in a bribery network that seeks to defraud drug traffickers and prisoners in the country with the excuse of raising them to total peace.
In addition, Nicolás will also have to bear the accusations of his ex-wife Day Vásquez. The woman pointed out that the politician received money from Samuel Lopesierra, alias El Hombre Marlboro and Alfonso Hilsaca, alias El Turco Hilsaca for the Petro Presidente campaign. However, says the complainant, the money ended up being invested in a luxurious house of 1,600 million pesos in Barranquilla.
“Our party has shown all the character, all the firmness, when someone has appeared entangled with the Odebrecht thing, that must be claimed before the country,” said the former president of Colombia.
Enteresis: Why did Nicolás Petro want to extend his tentacles to Monomeros?
Uribe Vélez recalled that his sons Tomás and Jerónimo Uribe have also been questioned for the political control of public opinion, but between the lines he made it clear that accusations have never been as serious as those that Nicolás Petro is now facing.
“They have endured all the political and legal stigmatization, after many years the Council has been in second instance confirmed what a court had said that their actions had not violated the law, ethics, or public morals.”Uribe pointed out.